Messages in this thread | | | From | David Howells <> | Subject | Re: linux-next: Tree for December 18 (fscache) | Date | Thu, 18 Dec 2008 17:47:56 +0000 |
| |
Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com> wrote:
> Should include/linux/buffer_head.h have an empty stub for fsync_super() > or does fscache even make sense when CONFIG_BLOCK=n?
FS-Cache might. CacheFiles probably doesn't.
There've been discussions about a separate caching backend to deal with non-rotating media such as large chunks of battery-backed RAM or flash. FS-Cache might make sense in such a situation as these could be accessed in other ways (such as through MTD or even directly).
I'll make CONFIG_CACHEFILES dependent on CONFIG_BLOCK.
David
| |